 |
Summer 2001
|
|
Summer 2001
|
The first four statements provided below reflect the criteria that I will use to evaluate the needs assessment assignment. The fifth statement addresses a specific requirement for the 1/2 unit folks.
You may apply this criteria to your own work and send it to me and I'll provide some comments where we differ (if we do). The same five point scale will be used, where:
1 = Outstanding (beyond my expectations)
2 = Very Good (superior work)
3 = Good (perfectly satisfactory – equivalent to B)
4 = Acceptable but Needs Improvement (will be accompanied by some suggestions for ways to make the next assignment better)
5 = Unsatisfactory (will be returned with request to redo).
Rating
Criteria
the paper is concise with no wasted words and includes a discussion of the problem (or opportunity), demonstrating that the writer(s) has/have a good understanding of it and its causes.
The arguments in support of addressing the need NOW are supported by persuasive documentation.
These arguments lead logically to a statement of a proposed solution that has face validity as a means of partially solving the problem at least on a local level.
The objectives make the goal (the proposed solution) concrete. They focus on the end(s) to be achieved and the anticipated benefit that some group of end-users will gain. They are observable and measureable.
1/2 unit only. The method(s) used to measure the objectives and to report the results is/are clear and seem(s) feasible.
Comments:
